| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2016 Subaru Forester and 2017 Mazda CX-3 Specifications
| Model Year | 2016 | 2017 | |
| Model | Subaru Forester | Mazda CX-3 | |
| Engine | |||
| Transmission | |||
| Drivetrain | |||
| Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
| Difference | |||
| Wheelbase | 103.9 in | 101.2 in | 2.7 in |
| Length | 180.9 in | 168.3 in | 12.6 in |
| Width | 70.7 in | 69.6 in | 1.1 in |
| Height | 66.4 in | 60.7 in | 5.7 in |
| Curb Weight | 3296 lb. | 2809 lb. | 487 lb. |
| Fuel Capacity | 15.9 gal. | 12.7 gal. | 3.2 gal. |
| Headroom, Row 1 | 41.4 in | 38.4 in | 3 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 57.0 in | 53.5 in | 3.5 in |
| Hip Room, Row 1 | 0.0 in | 52.3 in | -52.3 in |
| Legroom, Row 1 | 43.0 in | 41.7 in | 1.3 in |
| Headroom, Row 2 | 39.8 in | 37.2 in | 2.6 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 56.5 in | 50.4 in | 6.1 in |
| Hip Room, Row 2 | 0.0 in | 49.0 in | -49 in |
| Legroom, Row 2 | 38.0 in | 35.0 in | 3 in |
| Total Legroom | 81 in (over 2 rows) | 76.7 in (over 2 rows) | 4.3 in |
| Cargo Volume, Minimum | 34.4 ft3 | 12.4 ft3 | 22 ft3 |
| Cargo Volume, Maximum | 74.7 ft3 | 44.5 ft3 | 30.2 ft3 |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 Subaru Forester
| 2016 Subaru Forester Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2015 | 4dr SUV 170-horsepower 2.5L H4 CVT AWD |
I'm 6'3" and often don't fit comfortable in vehicles. I found this had a very nice amount of front seat room. The center console tends to stay out of the way as well, some newer designs have the center stack moving into where my right knee would be. It's a very noticeable improvement over my previous 2009 Escape. I actually found the Forester more comfortable for me than the Outback. I was expecting the opposite. see full Subaru Forester review |
| 2015 | 4dr SUV 170-horsepower 2.5L H4 CVT AWD |
After looking at Explorer's, I was surprised how much more room the Forester had in the back seat. Granted it doesn't have a third row, but if you don't need a 3rd row, the Forester is hard to beat in this segment for rear seat room. We can put a forward facing child seat in the back, move the front seat up a about 2 inches from all the way back and there's still plenty of front passenger room and my 1.5 year old son can't kick the back of the seat. see full Subaru Forester review |
| 2016 Subaru Forester Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2017 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 250hp 2.0L H4 8-speed shiftable CVT AWD |
- Terrible front seat support - The cushions are too short - It's not noticeable on a test drive right away. I would not have bought the car! Test drive extensively! - Surfaces where your elbows would lay are too hard - I purchased foam pads to make it feel better. - Tall drivers like myself will struggle with the telescoping wheel's short extension range. - It is hard to get into a fully comfortable driving position. The memory seats in the XT help somewhat by retaining your seat settings if moved. - Front seat cushions are too short - Yes I said this twice - Front seat cushions are too short - Yes I said this THREE times! Subaru are you listening? The front seat cushions are WAY TOO SHORT! see full Subaru Forester review |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2017 Mazda CX-3
| 2017 Mazda CX-3 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| 2016 | The CX-3's driving position is very good, more car-like even than the HR-V's. The view forward is open. The view rearward, not so much, as the racy styling yields rear windows that are quite a bit smaller than the front ones. To help compensate, the outside mirrors are large plus blind sport warning is standard on the Touring and Grand Touring. The CX-3's driver seat is very comfortable and provides good lateral support in turns. The cloth center pocket is cushy without being mushy. Unlike in the HR-V and some others, the headrest does not jut uncomfortably far forward. But the lumbar bulge is not adjustable. As is, it fit my back well, but many people will wish for more of a bulge. The HR-V's also non-adjustable lumbar bulge was too pronounced for my taste. The JUKE's seats are comfortable, but for effective side bolsters (and then some) you must step up to the NISMO. Worth noting for those of you who get your coffee to go: the cup holders are located beneath the armrest (optional on the Sport, standard on the others). If you want to use them, then you can't use the armrest. see full Mazda CX-3 review | |
| 2017 Mazda CX-3 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| For people who have no interest in a manual transmission (the great majority), the Mazda CX-3's largest shortcoming is a rear seat that is tight even by small car standards. Sitting behind my 5-9 self, my knees pressed lightly against the front seat backs. I wasn't uncomfortable, but felt a little closed-in. A shame, as rear headroom is relatively plentiful and the rear seat is otherwise very comfortable. The HR-V provides about four inches more rear legroom, a big difference. According to their specs, the JUKE has three inches less rear legroom than the Mazda. In reality, though, I had perhaps an inch more rear knee room, but less rear headroom. The Nissan's rear seat might be slightly more adult-friendly than the Mazda's, but neither is a good choice if people taller than me will be sitting in both rows. see full Mazda CX-3 review | ||
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2017 Mazda CX-3
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 Mazda CX-3.
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all Subaru models.
